[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200301185244.zkofjus6xtgkx4s3@wittgenstein>
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2020 19:52:44 +0100
From: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>
To: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
Cc: Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlinger@...mail.de>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Andrei Vagin <avagin@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
Yuyang Du <duyuyang@...il.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
James Morris <jamorris@...ux.microsoft.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
Christian Kellner <christian@...lner.me>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>,
"Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@...linux.org>,
"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] exec: Fix a deadlock in ptrace
On Sun, Mar 01, 2020 at 07:21:03PM +0100, Jann Horn wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 1, 2020 at 12:27 PM Bernd Edlinger
> <bernd.edlinger@...mail.de> wrote:
> > The proposed solution is to have a second mutex that is
> > used in mm_access, so it is allowed to continue while the
> > dying threads are not yet terminated.
>
> Just for context: When I proposed something similar back in 2016,
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20161102181806.GB1112@redhat.com/
> was the resulting discussion thread. At least back then, I looked
> through the various existing users of cred_guard_mutex, and the only
> places that couldn't be converted to the new second mutex were
> PTRACE_ATTACH and SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_TSYNC.
>
>
> The ideal solution would IMO be something like this: Decide what the
> new task's credentials should be *before* reaching de_thread(),
> install them into a second cred* on the task (together with the new
> dumpability), drop the cred_guard_mutex, and let ptrace_may_access()
> check against both. After that, some further restructuring might even
Hm, so essentially a private ptrace_access_cred member in task_struct?
That would presumably also involve altering various LSM hooks to look at
ptrace_access_cred.
(Minor side-note, de_thread() takes a struct task_struct argument but
only ever is passed current.)
> allow the cred_guard_mutex to not be held across all of the VFS
> operations that happen early on in execve, which may block
> indefinitely. But that would be pretty complicated, so I think your
> proposed solution makes sense for now, given that nobody has managed
> to implement anything better in the last few years.
Reading through the old threads and how often this issue came up, I tend
to agree.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists